One of my pleasures is the writings of Wil Wheaton. (Yes, long ago he played the annoying kid on Star Trek: The Next Generation — but he’s turned out to be a decent writer. Really!)
Thankfully, he doesn’t write about politics very often, because where that’s concerned he tends to spout a combination of froth and lefty talking points. He got a bit of a wake-up call this Christmas.
Briefly, Wil and his father had a death-penalty spat about Tookie Williams, and Wil’s response was to write what was essentially a hit piece on his parents — calling them “RNC talking-points pod people,” among other things — and he published it at Salon.com without running it by his folks first. Hey, he’s young. Naturally, they were hurt, and when Wil’s Mom gently pointed this out to him, to Wil’s (minimal) credit, he did a mea culpa, had a long heart-to-heart with his parents, and wrote a long blog post to straighten things out. He did a good job on it, though.
Now long ago, I heard a conservative lament that lefty types are always trying to convince people of the rightness of their position by tossing out facts and figures about a particular issue. That never works with conservatives, the argument goes, because a conservative’s position on any given issue tends to spring from core principles. To convince a conservative on an issue, you have to convince her to change one of her core principles.
Well, I think the reverse is true when trying to convince lefties that their position is wrong. Arguing core principles doesn’t work. And as a former college lefty (hey, I still have a bunch of Christic Institute-inspired comic books and other crap from during the eeeeevil Bush I years) I guess I’m still a believer that all it takes to bring someone around to reason on one issue or another is to hit him with enough facts, arguments and real-world experiences to discredit his mistaken notions. Rivrdog will probably say it’s because lefties have no core beliefs to begin with, but hey, it works for me — I’ve brought more than a few lefties to see the light this way, and here in the San Francisco Bay Area, that’s saying something.
I’ve found that the way to do it is one issue at a time, though. Open up some doubt in a person’s mind about the source of her received wisdom, and pretty soon she’ll be questioning other beliefs based on that source. I’ve been most successful by using the issue of gun control. The arguments for it are easily refuted; most people (especially mothers) really at their core do see the need to be able to defend themselves and just need some rational discussion of the subject in order for the light bulb to go on; and you can seal the deal by taking them shooting so they can see for themselves how safe, disciplined, fun and beneficial an activity it can be.
I think something similar’s happening with Mr. Wheaton. He’s complained for years about political polarization and stereotyping in this country. Even so, he just experienced first-hand how easy it is not only to stereotype people by their political beliefs, but also to stereotype those political beliefs as well. And he’s learned, in about the most gut-wrenching way possible, how wrong he was to do that.
I don’t think he’s consciously changed any of his political positions yet, but my prediction for 2006 is that at some point during the year, Wil Wheaton will find himself veering away from the party line on one issue or another. He’ll do this because 2006’s Wil Wheaton listened to, internalized and finally accepted an argument that 2005’s Wil Wheaton wouldn’t have paid attention to — because 2005’s Wil Wheaton would have demonized the messenger. 2006’s Wil Wheaton won’t, I think, be so quick to do that.
Come, come to the light, Wil!
And if Mr. Wheaton and his family ever are in the San Francisco Bay Area and would like to learn to shoot in a safe, clean, friendly and fun environment, well, I’ll make a standing invitation — range fees and ammo are on me.